Soviet air defenses - tips for dealing with them?

[istari6]

I'm a reasonably experienced IL-2 player, but I'm now starting to bring into two friends for co-op.  They're new to IL-2, and we're starting a campaign with PWCG.  First mission completed, great fun had by all.  Because I'm the most experienced pilot, I'm acting as flight leader for our group.  I want to be able to guide us and limit risks to my friends, but I don't actually know the types and effective ranges of Soviet air defenses in the game.  For context, we're flying our campaign for I./JG 52 at Stalingrad.  I know the Soviets have the GAZ-AAA and the 37mm (presumably the M1939 61-K).  I'm assuming they have the 85mm M1939 52-K further back from the frontline.

 

Is there any resource that can provide us the types of air defense weapons in the game, and the safe heights for dealing with these threats?  For example, if we're over a front line we're safe at 2000m (GAZ-AAA) but an airfield we might need to be above 4000m or higher to avoid 37mm fire, etc?

Edited November 4, 2019 by istari6

[busdriver]

Try this for a starting point. My apologies to the author, I have forgotten who posted this.

 

 

[Sublime]

Hmm.  Its odd to me the Mg34 has a range of 2km and the 12.7mm DSHK is listed at 900.

[Mauf]

22 minutes ago, Sublime said:

Hmm.  Its odd to me the Mg34 has a range of 2km and the 12.7mm DSHK is listed at 900.

There are two entries for the MG34, one for 2km and one at 700m. Think there were different beltings for the MG, with a tracerheavy AA belting probably getting the higher range.

 

As to the DSHK: it's a heavier caliber so max range should be shorter than a 8mm.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Mauf

[unreasonable]

45 minutes ago, Mauf said:

There are two entries for the MG34, one for 2km and one at 700m. Think there were different beltings for the MG, with a tracerheavy AA belting probably getting the higher range.

 

As to the DSHK: it's a heavier caliber so max range should be shorter than a 8mm.

 

A heavy calibre should have a longer range as it has a larger cartridge: as it does in the table, DSHK 900m, MG 34 700m, both entered as "Machine Gun".

 

I do not think the belting has anything to do with the difference in range between the MG 34 and the MG 34 AA - it is the mounting and gun sight.  Tracers do not have a longer range than ball.  The difference looks a little bit odd in terms of actual maximum range - they should be more or less identical - but of you are looking at effective maximum range in an AA role it may be reasonable. Standard mounting for MGs/HMGs are just not designed to engage aircraft overhead. 

Edited November 4, 2019 by unreasonable

[CrazyDuck]

All technical debates aside, you should always consider the drag'n'bag tactics for dealing with any kind of AAA. In simple words: First plane enters the AAA range, but does not proceed towards the AAA - instead it only plays bait and draws the fire at long distance (flying perpendicularly to AAA with unpredictable changes in pitch - this minimizes the chances of AAA hitting you to negligible levels). During that time your wingmen swoop in from the opposite direction and mop the floor with them. Even if the AAA tries to re-train guns on them, they will usually not succeed if your wingmen come in fast and from opposite direction. 

[Yogiflight]

2000m for the MG 34 is by far too high. The mounted ground version (sMG) might have had a max range of around 1000m (1200m? like the MG 3 on tripod of the Bundeswehr), the AA version should be around 1000m opening fire and effective range the mentioned 700m. The 2000m maybe typo? Shooting on an aircraft at 2k is as effective as throwing the belt into the next river.

Like @unreasonable pointed out, the different belting doesn't make any difference in range, more tracers is just for the gunner, so he can see better, where his shooting is, to change his aiming. The ammo for the MG 3 in the Bundeswehr was two rounds with tracers, three without. Makes quite some fun shooting at night and it makes aiming much easier.

[unreasonable]

18 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

2000m for the MG 34 is by far too high. The mounted ground version (sMG) might have had a max range of around 1000m (1200m? like the MG 3 on tripod of the Bundeswehr), the AA version should be around 1000m opening fire and effective range the mentioned 700m. The 2000m maybe typo? Shooting on an aircraft at 2k is as effective as throwing the belt into the next river.

 

 

Actually theoretical maximum range for MG 34 is 4,700m!  I recall our old 7.62 GPMGs being fired out to 1800m range with hardly any elevation from a tripod mount.  Standard rifle calibre ammunition in those days went a very long way indeed, but at 2,000m or so MGs are very much an area weapon.

 

Even if you do not hit at 2,000m, and I agree that you rarely will, the sight of tracers coming up may cause an inexperienced pilot to veer off course, drop short or just fly so fast that he cannot aim well. AA effectiveness is not just about the number of hits or aircraft shot down: more important is how it limits the effectiveness of the attackers.  So effective range is at least the range at which tracers burn out, plus a fair bit more.  I expect some gun nut knows how far MG 34 tracers burn: Just checking the GPMG' standard 7.62 tracer round was good to 1,100m.

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, unreasonable said:

the sight of tracers coming up

This is a question I always wondered. Do you really see tracers of rounds pointing at you. I don't think so. The tracer is at the rear end of the bullet, so my guess is, you only can see them from behind and the side. This would mean, you can see the tracers of rounds heading for you, not before they pass your position.

1 hour ago, unreasonable said:

Actually theoretical maximum range for MG 34 is 4,700m!  I recall our old 7.62 GPMGs being fired out to 1800m range with hardly any elevation from a tripod mount.  Standard rifle calibre ammunition in those days went a very long way indeed, but at 2,000m or so MGs are very much an area weapon.

I just had a look at Wikipedia, 2000m from bipod? The max range for our MG 3 from bipod was 600m. In 2k you hardly can see anyone. How do you want to aim? And the spread at that distance is huge. And the spread when shooting with AA tripod is even worse.

[MikhaVT]

2 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Shooting on an aircraft at 2k is as effective as throwing the belt into the next river.

 

sounds like the same philosophy as my friend who was an M240B gunner in the marines. Said he could never fire more than 3 rounds of blanks without the thing jamming. Tossed some 2000 rounds of 7.62 nato off a cliff since he couldnt fire them off and was sick of carrying them. 

[unreasonable]

54 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

This is a question I always wondered. Do you really see tracers of rounds pointing at you. I don't think so. The tracer is at the rear end of the bullet, so my guess is, you only can see them from behind and the side. This would mean, you can see the tracers of rounds heading for you, not before they pass your position.

I just had a look at Wikipedia, 2000m from bipod? The max range for our MG 3 from bipod was 600m. In 2k you hardly can see anyone. How do you want to aim? And the spread at that distance is huge. And the spread when shooting with AA tripod is even worse.

 

Yes you can see tracers from in front. It is not a point of light, it is more of a ball of flame at the base of the bullet. 

  

The max range of MGs from a bipod is not 600m. That is the maximum tactical engagement range for effective fire against individual infantry targets or similar.  You can usefully fire bipod mounted MGs (in section LMG role) at greater ranges upto about 1,000m if you have a target such as a marching column of men or a soft vehicle.

 

It does not matter whether you fire a round from a bipod, tripod or from the hip: it's range is the same. What differs is the probability of hitting anything. 

 

The ranges given in busdriver's chart are not maximum ranges: they are more like maximum effective ranges, but only approximately, given typical targets.  The effective range of sustained fire GPMGs (ie tripod mounted) is up to 1,800m, at which it will create a beaten zone. This is the British Army's number, if you do not believe me. To suppress ground targets or piss off pilots you do not need a narrow spread: you just get your burst in their general area.  Hitting aircraft with small arms will always be largely a matter of luck, even if the firer has been given some basic training in deflection, but if you have enough guns you will get a few hits.

[Sublime]

So I can has cookie for noticing chart is off?

5 hours ago, Mauf said:

There are two entries for the MG34, one for 2km and one at 700m. Think there were different beltings for the MG, with a tracerheavy AA belting probably getting the higher range.

 

As to the DSHK: it's a heavier caliber so max range should be shorter than a 8mm.

If that was true the longest sniper shot in history from a barret .50 cal (eg 12.7) wouldnt have been possible.

Nor would the US have used .50s for AA..  

Also if heavier caliber = shorter range than the 88 for example should only be good at 200 meters; and so on. Obviously thats not the case

Edited November 4, 2019 by Sublime

[[CPT]Crunch]

US Navy figured it out quick, dumped every machine gun overboard fast, statistically they're not even a factor in an air defensive role, not even when you know the planes are coming straight at you, the when and where, utterly useless.

[MikhaVT]

36 minutes ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

US Navy figured it out quick, dumped every machine gun overboard fast, statistically they're not even a factor in an air defensive role, not even when you know the planes are coming straight at you, the when and where, utterly useless.

 

Yep, but the US Army found the M2 .50 cal "anti-aircraft" machine guns on their tanks very useful -- just not for shooting air targets ?

 

I only played TC for a few minutes with some other people, but i found that the M4's .50 cal AA gun was somewhat useful for warding off aircraft which were heading straight at me, this was ignoring the fear any such machinegunner would have staring down a Bf 109's guns...

Edited November 4, 2019 by Kataphrakt

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, unreasonable said:

The max range of MGs from a bipod is not 600m. That is the maximum tactical engagement range for effective fire against individual infantry targets or similar

LOL. Yes you are of course right. I used the wrong term. The max range of the MG 3 is 3750m.

3 hours ago, unreasonable said:

This is the British Army's number, if you do not believe me

I absolutely don't doubt it. Different armies have different principles for combat. We didn't even with the coaxial MG 3 of our IFV shoot at that distances. The max distance I ever shot with it was 1000m. Above we tent to use the 20mm. The problem with the MG is, you need to have the distance pretty exactly, on these distances, as the trajectory is quite curved. With the guns being above the sight line in our IFV, you saw the MG tracers fall out of the sky, when shooting on such distances.

[istari6]

14 hours ago, CrazyDuck said:

All technical debates aside, you should always consider the drag'n'bag tactics for dealing with any kind of AAA. In simple words: First plane enters the AAA range, but does not proceed towards the AAA - instead it only plays bait and draws the fire at long distance (flying perpendicularly to AAA with unpredictable changes in pitch - this minimizes the chances of AAA hitting you to negligible levels). During that time your wingmen swoop in from the opposite direction and mop the floor with them. Even if the AAA tries to re-train guns on them, they will usually not succeed if your wingmen come in fast and from opposite direction. 

 

Yup!  I didn't know the term for this tactic, but we've already been using something similar, trying to attack from opposite sides.  Whoever the AAA fires at breaks off while the other aircraft presses home the attack.  

14 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

2000m for the MG 34 is by far too high. The mounted ground version (sMG) might have had a max range of around 1000m (1200m? like the MG 3 on tripod of the Bundeswehr), the AA version should be around 1000m opening fire and effective range the mentioned 700m. The 2000m maybe typo? Shooting on an aircraft at 2k is as effective as throwing the belt into the next river.

Like @unreasonable pointed out, the different belting doesn't make any difference in range, more tracers is just for the gunner, so he can see better, where his shooting is, to change his aiming. The ammo for the MG 3 in the Bundeswehr was two rounds with tracers, three without. Makes quite some fun shooting at night and it makes aiming much easier.

 

These numbers are helpful, but they also seem to assume level firing (e.g. a gunnery range).  I imagine the range was less when firing up and also fighting gravity.  Would imagine that 7.62mm wouldn't be effective much beyond 1000m (~3000ft) when firing upwards.  

On 11/3/2019 at 6:02 PM, busdriver said:

Try this for a starting point. My apologies to the author, I have forgotten who posted this.

 

 

 

Gotcha, these are the kinds of numbers I was seeking, thanks!

So I have the following:

Gaz-AAA - 2000m

61K (37mm) - 3000m 

52K (85mm) - 11000m

Also, were there any other major air defense weapons the Soviets used on the Eastern Front through the Battle of Kuban?  I know the GAZ-AAA, 61K and 52K listed above.  Are there any other weapons in game, or were there major weapons the Soviets used that haven't been modeled yet in IL-2?  For background, I knew little about the Eastern Front air war until getting into IL-2 GB, so still coming up the learning curve here.

[unreasonable]

This is for Germans but should be helpful.  Picture is a summary, article here: https://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt07/german-aaa.html

 

 

 

[Yogiflight]

2 hours ago, unreasonable said:

This is for Germans but should be helpful.  Picture is a summary, article here: https://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt07/german-aaa.html

 

 

 

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing this. One thing, that would be interesting to know, too, is what the horizontal range at different altitudes was for the different guns. Which means in what radius could for example a 85mm gun of the Russians shoot at aircrafts at, let's say 4k altitude.

[MikhaVT]

24 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing this. One thing, that would be interesting to know, too, is what the horizontal range at different altitudes was for the different guns. Which means in what radius could for example a 85mm gun of the Russians shoot at aircrafts at, let's say 4k altitude.

 

since you have a max ceiling at 0m horizontal distance and what others here have suggested is the max horizontal range, you can use some trig to figure this out. Imagine that you draw a line from the AA to the ceiling, then from the AA position to the horizontal range. connect these two lines and you have the hypotenuse of a right triangle. The range the AA would have at a given altitude is roughly based off drawing a smaller triangle where the vertical side would be the length of the altitude, and with the same angle between the hypotenuse and horizontal side as with the original triangle's angle. You solve that to get the horizontal range, then subtract the max horizontal range from the solved on to get it. 

 

or more simply at a given altitude the horizontal range of the AA is roughly:

 

(Horiz range)-(altitude/(Ceiling/(horiz range)))

 

In reality the range is probably more closely defined as a parabola, but a triangle is close-enough of an approximation 

Edited November 5, 2019 by Kataphrakt

[istari6]

Yes, very interesting graph!  

 

Recalculating for meters, I get the following rough guidelines:

7.62mm = 760m effective ceiling, shells can reach up to 2400m

37mm = 1500m effective ceiling, shells self-destruct at 3900m

88mm = 7900m effective ceiling, shells self-destruct at 10,000m.

 

Assuming Soviet ballistics were roughly similar (German 88 was probably higher performing than Soviet 85), this seems a good guide for worst case (a shot directly overheard with 0m horizontal displacement).

 

Edited November 5, 2019 by istari6

[unreasonable]

13 hours ago, Kataphrakt said:

 

since you have a max ceiling at 0m horizontal distance and what others here have suggested is the max horizontal range, you can use some trig to figure this out. Imagine that you draw a line from the AA to the ceiling, then from the AA position to the horizontal range. connect these two lines and you have the hypotenuse of a right triangle. The range the AA would have at a given altitude is roughly based off drawing a smaller triangle where the vertical side would be the length of the altitude, and with the same angle between the hypotenuse and horizontal side as with the original triangle's angle. You solve that to get the horizontal range, then subtract the max horizontal range from the solved on to get it. 

 

or more simply at a given altitude the horizontal range of the AA is roughly:

 

(Horiz range)-(altitude/(Ceiling/(horiz range)))

 

In reality the range is probably more closely defined as a parabola, but a triangle is close-enough of an approximation 

 

I would prefer to remember the altitude as a limit for the heavy guns and the line of sight range for the smaller ones.  For instance, an 88mm that can reach almost 10,000m max altitude, can still reach 6,000m altitude at 10,000m horizontal range,  fired at ~37 degrees elevation which is it's max range elevation to give a max range of 15,000m.  Your rule of thumb gives 3,300m.   

 

For a small calibre weapon that reaches it's effective limit (tracer burn out) in 2-3 seconds the gravity vector is very small: ~100ft so the effective range - as a line of sight - will be almost the same whatever the elevation. 

 

BTW - there is a fun graph/calculator here that includes air resistance effects  on trajectories - most of them except the specialist small arms calculators do not. With a bit of fiddling you can model the trajectory of a shell -  hence my very approximate estimates above.

 https://www.desmos.com/calculator/on4xzwtdwz

Edited November 6, 2019 by unreasonable

[Gambit21]

Guns in game have shorter ranges than RL I’ve learned. Found this out trying to get an M1 to shoot @ 15-20 miles.

 

Turns out it won’t make (or come close to) the gun’s real life minimum range of 13 miles.

[MikhaVT]

10 hours ago, unreasonable said:

 

I would prefer to remember the altitude as a limit for the heavy guns and the line of sight range for the smaller ones.  For instance, an 88mm that can reach almost 10,000m max altitude, can still reach 6,000m altitude at 10,000m horizontal range,  fired at ~37 degrees elevation which is it's max range elevation to give a max range of 15,000m.  Your rule of thumb gives 3,300m.   

 

Good point, i forgot about the lift bullets can generate when fired.

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

Guns in game have shorter ranges than RL I’ve learned. Found this out trying to get an M1 to shoot @ 15-20 miles.

 

Turns out it won’t make (or come close to) the gun’s real life minimum range of 13 miles.

Do we have the 203mm M1 in game? I would have thought, it is the 155mm M1 Long Tom.

[Gambit21]

2 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

Do we have the 203mm M1 in game? I would have thought, it is the 155mm M1 Long Tom.

 

Can’t remember off the top of my head and away from the puter. I just know I looked it up/verified min/max ranges and started testing and couldn’t get the thing to fire even at 13 miles.

 

Right now I’m at roughly 11000 meters.

It should be able to sit at Florennes and fire over the “Bulge” lines easily.